Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery—Plastic Operations, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131 Mainz, Germany
Victor Palarie
Laboratory of Tissue Engineering and Cellular Culture, State University of Medicine and Pharmaceutics “Nicolae Testemitanu”, Stefan cel Mare si Sfant Boulevard 165, 2004 Chisinau, Moldova
Daniel G. E. Thiem
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery—Plastic Operations, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131 Mainz, Germany
Philipp Becker
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Federal Armed Forces Hospital, Rübenacherstr. 170, 56072 Koblenz, Germany
Amely Hartmann
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery—Plastic Operations, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131 Mainz, Germany
Diana Heimes
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery—Plastic Operations, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131 Mainz, Germany
Bilal Al-Nawas
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery—Plastic Operations, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131 Mainz, Germany
Peer W. Kämmerer
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery—Plastic Operations, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131 Mainz, Germany
This study compared the osseointegration of acid-etched, ultrahydrophilic, micro- and nanostructured implant surfaces (ANU) with non-ultra-hydrophilic, microstructured (SA) and non-ultrahydrophilic, micro- and nanostructured implant surfaces (AN) in vivo. Fifty-four implants (n = 18 per group) were bilaterally inserted into the proximal tibia of New Zealand rabbits (n = 27). After 1, 2, and 4 weeks, bone-implant contact (BIC, %) in the cortical (cBIC) and spongious bone (sBIC), bone chamber ingrowth (BChI, %), and the supra-crestal, subperiosteal amount of newly formed bone, called percentage of linear bone fill (PLF, %), were analyzed. After one week, cBIC was significantly higher for AN and ANU when compared to SA (p = 0.01 and p = 0.005). PLF was significantly increased for ANU when compared to AN and SA (p = 0.022 and p = 0.025). After 2 weeks, cBIC was significantly higher in SA when compared to AN (p = 0.039) and after 4 weeks, no significant differences in any of the measured parameters were found anymore. Ultrahydrophilic implants initially improved osseointegration when compared to their non-ultrahydrophilic counterparts. In accordance, ultrahydrophilic implants might be appropriate in cases with a necessity for an accelerated and improved osseointegration, such as in critical size alveolar defects or an affected bone turnover.
